• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

More speaker cable "stuff"- the Silversmith Audio Fidelium Loudspeaker cables.

wyn palmer said:
If I wanted frequency response modifications for my system, I'm pretty sure that I wouldn't think that the process of selecting a cable in an essentially random ad hoc way would be the way I would choose to do it.
Still, each to their own.
Click to expand...

Agreed 100%

Then of course there is always going to be the guy that puts these Fideliums in a system exactly as yours and then waxes poetic about the new found bloom and richness these cables gave him.
 
Vintagear said:
Agreed 100%

Then of course there is always going to be the guy that puts these Fideliums in a system exactly as yours and then waxes poetic about the new found bloom and richness these cables gave him.
Click to expand...
Remember, the response will be different for each speaker depending on its impedance/frequency curve.
You could measure the speaker impedances in advance and determine how the response would change. It won't necessarily be a rolling off at HF. It could be almost anything.
 
wyn palmer said:
Remember, the response will be different for each speaker depending on its impedance/frequency curve.
You could measure the speaker impedances in advance and determine how the response would change. It won't necessarily be a rolling off at HF. It could be almost anything.
Click to expand...
Continuing that thought, it would seem possible, then, that a given cable, with (ahem) unusual qualities like this one, used with a given amp and given speaker COULD actually yield a flatter frequency response overall of the impedance/frequency response curves of the speaker were unusual to start with. However, if that were the case, wouldn't the design of the speaker be suspect?
 
wyn palmer said:
Remember, the response will be different for each speaker depending on its impedance/frequency curve.
You could measure the speaker impedances in advance and determine how the response would change. It won't necessarily be a rolling off at HF. It could be almost anything.
Click to expand...

Yup, understood.
I still don’t think it would stop someone (especially a reviewer) with your same exact set-up who firmly believes high cost “high-end” cables are better than high-quality (properly spec’d) cables and who buys into the impressive sounding marketing to claim that the Fideliums imparted something wonderful and revelatory to his sound.
 
Last edited:
MuseChaser said:
Continuing that thought, it would seem possible, then, that a given cable, with (ahem) unusual qualities like this one, used with a given amp and given speaker COULD actually yield a flatter frequency response overall of the impedance/frequency response curves of the speaker were unusual to start with. However, if that were the case, wouldn't the design of the speaker be suspect?
Click to expand...
Yes. It could, theoretically. Speakers often show irregularities in gain at crossover points where the impedance often fluctuates. I can certainly speculate that the impedance and gain could be locally going in opposite directions so that the cable would compensate, however such speculation would most likely be specious.
 
wyn palmer said:
I'm not going to comment too much on the paper. The math presented seems like a direct copy from EE early undergraduate courses on electromagnetism and can be found on line.
The conclusions essentially are that due to conduction/skin effect issues the audio signal propagates through the cable at a speed which is a fraction- in the order of 10%- of the speed of sound.
Thus, transmission line effects are important, as is the microstructure of the conductor, which cause internal reflections "muddying" the sound.
This justifies all of the choices that were made in the design of his cables.
Yes, they would be important if his conclusions were indeed true- i.e. the speed of sound is c. 340m/s, so the waveform would propagate at 34m/s and the 10 ft (3m) cables would be a half wavelength at c. 5Hz! It would also mean that the delay would be in the order of 100ms, not 1us!
He is correct that the two conductors- the one from the amp to the speaker and the return one from the speaker to the amp- do form a transmission line. What he gets wrong is the frequency scale at which this becomes important.
Clearly the author didn't learn about the Poynting vector and the transfer of energy in a conductor/transmission line- which essentially means that the energy is transferred in the EM fields and not within the conductor itself- and hence is governed by the permeability and permittivity of the dielectric between the two "plates" of the cables. They generally teach that in 4th year EE and graduate level Physics in the US. Thus, the "energy" propagates at c. 50% of the speed of light or in the order of 5 million times faster than he states.
That made all of his conclusions concerning dispersion and reflections and the effect of imperfections/dislocations in the conductor entirely spurious.
Click to expand...
You have a good handle on wires and have an educated understanding of the fact that different wires sometimes sound different, so I have a question. I have a piece of gear that has a class A line level output. The output is a bit higher (300 ohms) than most modern line level device outputs (most seem to be 100 ohms or less). I've noticed that the "sonic" signatures of various interconnects seem to be magnified with this particular piece of gear. Does the higher output impedance somehow influence the "sound" of the cables used to connect it to my pre-amp? My pre-amp inputs are are 30kohm as I assume that may be important for your answer as well?
 
MuseChaser said:
Continuing that thought, it would seem possible, then, that a given cable, with (ahem) unusual qualities like this one, used with a given amp and given speaker COULD actually yield a flatter frequency response overall of the impedance/frequency response curves of the speaker were unusual to start with. However, if that were the case, wouldn't the design of the speaker be suspect?
Click to expand...

That’s the “ad-hoc” Russian roulette method :biggrin:. Not a game I’m interested in playing.
I prefer using an amp that measures well like the AHB2 with properly spec’d high quality cables and leave the colorations at the transducers.
 
If only the two sides could agree and understand that you need both listening and measurements to be successful, there has to be a balance as with everything in life . It’s not all or nothing.


Audiofreak71
 
Audiofreak71 said:
If only the two sides could agree and understand that you need both listening and measurements to be successful, there has to be a balance as with everything in life . It’s not all or nothing.


Audiofreak71
Click to expand...
The two sides do agree- at least in my case-and I'm not going to go over my "audiophile/technical resume" to support it.
It's a false dichotomy in my opinion. You need to measure the right things. That's rarely done, and these days even less often than used to be the case, even though in many ways it's easier than ever.. Frankly I don't understand the subjectivists objection to exposing something like this that is inherently flawed, nor their willingness to just throw out hard won psycho acoustic results.
You should be happy. I've shown- conclusively- that cables CAN matter, and that skin effect CAN matter, if not for the bogus reasons that are often stated.
 
soundmig said:
You have a good handle on wires and have an educated understanding of the fact that different wires sometimes sound different, so I have a question. I have a piece of gear that has a class A line level output. The output is a bit higher (300 ohms) than most modern line level device outputs (most seem to be 100 ohms or less). I've noticed that the "sonic" signatures of various interconnects seem to be magnified with this particular piece of gear. Does the higher output impedance somehow influence the "sound" of the cables used to connect it to my pre-amp? My pre-amp inputs are are 30kohm as I assume that may be important for your answer as well?
Click to expand...
I cannot answer that. Possibly the distortion levels increase substantially into more capacitive loads, possibly the stage becomes unstable, etc. etc. There are a number of possibilities and you have not provided sufficient information to make a valid observation.
 
wyn palmer said:
Frankly I don't understand the subjectivists objection to exposing something like this that is inherently flawed, nor their willingness to just throw out hard won psycho acoustic results.
You should be happy. I've shown- conclusively- that cables CAN matter, and that skin effect CAN matter, if not for the bogus reasons that are often stated.
Click to expand...

…or the bogus superior outcomes often claimed.

In my view it’s usually poorly designed cables (or amplifiers) that reflect these differences the most.
I mean how much better measurably and audibly are you going to be able to get in your system than with the plain Jane high quality Mogabis?
You’re already tracking within 1/10th of a dB at worst and I’m sure there are still folks out there saying that you’d get more “resolution” with “their” cables but only if your system could resolve it as if they were taking to someone with a kit tube amp from 1955.
 
Last edited:
wyn palmer said:
I cannot answer that. Possibly the distortion levels increase substantially into more capacitive loads, possibly the stage becomes unstable, etc. etc. There are a number of possibilities and you have not provided sufficient information to make a valid observation.
Click to expand...
OK, thanks
 
Back in the late 50's and 60's speaker manufacturers intentionally rolled off the highs because the source material available wasn't up to the task. Some of the recordings the tape hiss was quite apparent and Lp's with the cartridges available could cause high frequency resonances that weren't desirable. As time passed with better tape and phono cartridges and people got away from pre-recorded 1/4 trk tapes and companies like Audio Fidelity, Command, Mercury, Sheffield and Mobile fidelity along with others like A&M and Verve were using the latest technology to produce LP's speaker frequency response was improved by using more sophisticated tweeter materials.

When digital came along some times things got to bright and to closely miked and the idea of rolling off the highs again, though booed, was an acceptable alternative. Thats why I roll off my highs a bit, but they can be easily restored with the graphic controls on the Stereo pre-amp for the stereo system and on the HT system with the tone controls. I have also learned that on most what I call techno and ski fi movies I turn down the LFE channel 3 or 4 db to give a more balanced less distorted and faithful sound. I can always return the LFE channel to the calibrated setting with simple push of a button on the remote.

So don't criticize your friend to much between male hearing loss and the possibility of hearing distortions because of his compromised ears he may truly find the sound very acceptable and pleasing.

I admire your attention to detail and being very thorough in your testing. But it would have been a big saving if your friend had just used good 12 AWG speaker wire and learned not to fear using his tone controls.

I have been investing in buying pre-owned LP's lately and you would be amazed how many recordings made in the early days of Stereo had very little content above 9 KHZ. So its no wonder when they are reissued on LP today digital processing is being used to try to bring a more accurate presentation of the original performance with out Lf distortions on the original LP's below 50 HZ , tape hiss, deteriorating HF on the tape and so many other issues. So if you bought your LP's in the 60's and 70's and compare them to the new releases yes there will be a difference. Good or bad only you can decide. Same goes for your friend and his cables.
 
lini said:
Not sure, whether that's inevitable.

Personally I already quit reading our usual audio magazines over here quite a long time ago, when these wouldn't provide enough measurement results anymore (but rather either none at all or merely the most basic ones...). Because I've got ears and an individual taste myself, so that listening tests performed by reviewers, whose tastes I don't know, to me are of secondary interest at best. Whereas what I don't have, is decent, expensive measurement equipment. Hence it's measurement results, that I'd foremost need to be provided by those mags - so if I don't get these anymore, I can rather save the money for those mags and spend it on accessories and music instead.

Greetings from Munich!

Manfred / lini
Click to expand...
Manfred,

the times of "HiFi Stereophonie" with Karl Breh and Arndt Klingelnberg and their colleagues are long gone. It is significant that "Bild-Zeitung" - like magazines like "Audio" and "Stereoplay" simply sold better here. It´s a shame!
 
Thorsten R. said:
Manfred,

the times of "HiFi Stereophonie" with Karl Breh and Arndt Klingelnberg and their colleagues are long gone. It is significant that "Bild-Zeitung" - like magazines like "Audio" and "Stereoplay" simply sold better here. It´s a shame!
Click to expand...

Yes, I have a good friend that writes for audio "magazines" like Hifi choice, audioXpress, Stereonet, Australian Hi-Fi and previously Hi-Fi World, and he never does any measurements. Despite the fact that he has a BSc in Physics.
He has written on the subject of cables. He's a great believer. He knows that I'm much more of an objectivist.
Cable Sound - Do Cables Make a Difference? (rssconsultancy.co.uk)
He describes the properties of cables.
He also brings up the characteristic impedance issue.
Coaxial Cable Characteristic Impedance vs Frequency (jensign.com)
And although I generally don't like to refer to anything by PSAudio, in this case there's a lot of useful info- if a bit fuzzy.
Cable Design and the Speed of Sound, Part One – PS Audio


Image_011-300x99.jpg

R is the DC resistance per meter, C is the capacitance per meter. C is an inverse function of the relative permittivity of the dielectric, e0 (in the case of the Fidelium it is, in essence, air). This is why it is often stated that a lower e0 gives a superior cable for audio.
So, what is the velocity of propagation for the Fidelium cable, with 0.8ohms/m and 25pF/m measured?
20Hz- 3.5x10^6 m/s or 1% of c.
200Hz- 10.5x10^6 m/s or 3% of c.
20kHz- actually >30% of c.
We have a 3m length, so what is the delay.
20Hz- 1.2us
200Hz- 400ns
20kHz - 40ns
The square wave was delayed by c. 1us, so it all seems reasonable.
For the cheap Mogami what are the measured numbers?
R= 8mohms/m, c= 270pF. Note that the RC product is c. 1/10 that of the Fidelium.
We have a 3m length, so what is the delay.
20Hz- c. 400ns
200Hz- c. 130ns
20kHz - c. 20ns.
In other words- the cheap cable is much more ideal, in this respect, than the audiophile one.
Also, remember that my own cables are 1/3 this length and the delay times are reduced accordingly.
To put this into some kind of perspective,
1us delay for sound translates to an effective change in distance of 340um- that is c. 5x the width of a human hair!
Now, concerning the characteristic impedance rise at LF and its consequences.
Yes, it's true that the characteristic impedance of a cable increases enormously as the frequency approaches DC. This is because, in effect, the cable transitions from a distributed (i.e. transmission line) component to a lumped component.
Zo (the cable characteristic impedance) starts to become more resistive than inductive as Zo approaches the cable DC resistance (Rc). Since the capacitive impedance is much smaller than Rc and the capacitive impedance increases as the frequency is lowered, the net effect is that the characteristic impedance Zo increases strongly as the frequency is lowered and the phase angle becomes more negative or capacitive in character- that is in the LF domain the cable looks like a lumped LRC element, not a transmission line.
Also, we've indirectly investigated the impedance levels of the ML ESL 11A- and it varies wildly. The cable cap is in the order of 100s of PF, the ESL in the order of several uF.
There is a massive impedance missmatch which gets worse as the frequency approaches 20kHz. Yet, ESLs are amongst the lowest "noise" floor, more intrinsically detailed, loudspeakers. How does this support the idea that transmission line reflections in the cable reduce detail and increase the noise floor, when a traditional loudspeaker is, in fact a better match, overall.
Also, what about the internal cabling in the loudspeaker? All wires act as transmission lines to some extent, as long as there is a return path which is not at "infinity"- which there must be as speakers are, generally, returning the signal current to the source directly.
Why don't they contribute to the theoretical "smearing" especially in large ESLs with significant electrical signal runs?
More about cables from Neville.
Microsoft Word - Soundbites - Black Rhodium Cables.doc (rssconsultancy.co.uk)
Nordost Blue Heaven RCA Interconnect Cable Review | StereoNET United Kingdom
We have many- interesting- conversations on a variety of topics- like why he's convinced that the addition of a super tweeter improves the bass response in his listening room.
 
Last edited:
Just for a lark, I decided to do the same kind of electrical "assessment" of the Nordost Valhalla 2 speaker cable based on published specs. It has 14 28AWG wires per path.
DCR- c. 5mohms/ft- 100 mohms/10ft there and back, excluding connectors.
C- 10.9pF/ft.- 109pF for 10 ft.
L: .125uH/ft.- 1.25uH for 10 feet excluding connectors.
The Fidelium has c. 2x the inductance of the Nordost (just one wide conductor) but 2/3 the capacitance (very large separation between the two paths).
That implies that at frequencies where the cable acts as a transmission line that they behave very similarly as far as propagation delay is concerned.

The Mogami has 30% lower inductance than the Nordost (0.85uH versus 1.25uH), but 8x the capacitance (850pF versus 109pF). That means that it has c. 2.4x the delay versus the Nordost (40% the propagation velocity) in regions where it acts like a transmission line.
The Nordost has c. 4x the DCR of the Mogami, and 1/25th that of the Fidelium.
So, what does this imply: The RC product of the Nordost is smaller than the Mogami- about 50% smaller in fact. This implies that the delays are, in general, 28% smaller.
So, the delays in the audio band are:
20Hz- c. 290ns
200Hz- c. 100ns
20kHz - c. 12ns.
This is estimated.
The Mogami costs $90. The Nordost, approximately $15000.
I guess that the extra 28% just doesn't come cheaply. Note that the delta for the delays over the audio band is 380ns for the Mogami and 278ns for the Nordost.
I'd love for someone to explain to me how the 100ns difference, diminishing with frequency, matters that much.
It represents <0.001 degrees of phase shift at 20 Hz and 200Hz and about twice that at 20kHz.
I think that I got this right. Please correct if I've made an error.
In addition, if I scale the Mogami cable to the 4' length it becomes
20Hz- c. 160ns
200Hz- c. 52ns
20kHz- c. 8ns.
Better than the 10' Nordost...
NOTE: I did get the wrong C and L values initially and made a silly math error. Now corrected.
 
Last edited:
I am a numbers guy, too. But in this case its what you enjoy and of course its all about the performance and the results reaching your ears in your environment. If you like the sound, screw the numbers. All you have to do is move your head side to side or up and down off axis and you will have more time shift and destructive interference compromising the sound than the numbers mentioned here. Further more if you have reflections off the floor or ceiling and you are in the near field the errors will even be more apparent. So yes numbers are important. The electronic numbers or the acoustical numbers. The acoustical numbers are infinitely more damaging compared the the slight electronic errors. Even with sealed electrostatic head phones there are so many issues with the human ear canal all the electronic issues only make a small fraction of what are brain interprets after receiving the audio signal transferred to the brain.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom